JohnCh

Warning: lots of drivel ahead! The short version for those with better things to do is that I will be asking a lot of Caterham-related questions over the next several months. And for those with too much time on their hands…After more than 20 years of Westfield ownership, I'm turning to the dark side; a deposit was placed last month on a new Caterham. The build slot is still pending given Caterham has yet to figure out their 2022 schedule, but it appears the kit won't arrive until sometime in the Spring. Although I love the Westfield and its recently completed 2.0L Duratec, that infamous engine build process showed me just how much I'm craving a big project. I'm also at a point where the window for me to undertake something like this is closing, so it's now or never. After considering several options, it came down to either building another Westfield or trying my hand at a Caterham. My Westfield has a number of custom touches to better align the car with my tastes and preferences. After living with those mods for years, I wouldn't do any of them differently. This means building another Westfield -- while vastly cheaper -- would simply be a rehash of the previous build. Not much of a learning experience or challenge. With the Caterham, both the assembly process and things I wish to change from stock are new puzzles to solve. Unfortunately, Caterham won't sell a kit without a drivetrain, and my original workaround of buying a 360R or 420R and simply swapping engines with the Westfield turns out to be anything but simple or cheap. Packaging differences mean the Caterham's intake would need to be replaced with Jenveys or their equivalent, then a programmable ECU to accommodate that change, followed by an engine loom for the ECU, and several other minor items. Yes, I could avoid this slippery slope and take cheaper shortcuts, but the Westfield is a great car and I want to keep it that way for the next owner. Surprisingly, the alternative of keeping the Westfield as-is, selling the 420R crate engine, and building a new, more powerful 2.4L Duratec is only marginally more expensive. The upside from this approach is a better Westfield that needs no effort to prep for sale, a much faster Caterham, and I can spend all my build, design, and fabrication cycles on the new car rather than plotting to pull the soul from an old friend. More to come on the spec…. -John

Sorry @Vovchandr, I should have been clearer. I mean a video that shows them in action on the road rather than in a brightly lit studio. -John

If the car was level when you checked, then either someone filled it when it wasn't level, or they filled it with the top cover off. Or you could be lucky and a previous owner added a filler plug on that top cover. Regardless, you don't want to overfill the gearbox. In fact, Ford reduced the amount of oil required during the type-9 run by lowering the fill hole location. Might be worth going through some of the downloads in the Gearbox section here. -John

Hopefully they'll publish a video soon showing these in action. The aspect I like most is the removal of the ponderous fog and reverse lights. I wonder if this package will become standard, thus eliminating the holes for those two lights and providing a cleaner look? -John

The range the throttle travels is less than the range of the TPS -- i.e. it equates to a smaller range than 0-5 volts. The ECU needs to understand what voltage equals idle and what voltage equals full throttle so it can interpolate the engine load at any given throttle opening and apply the right fuel and spark for that load and rpm. I'm not sure if Pectel has a calibration setting to do this or if you are supposed to determine idle and full throttle voltage settings and build it yourself. In the Emerald, you simply go to a settings page, click OK, floor the throttle, release the throttle, then click OK again. The software figures out the range from there. If I understand what you wrote earlier, it sounds like the TPS voltage is not sweeping linearly from 0-5 volts. If that's the case, the ECU will be feeding the wrong fuel and spark to the engine when the voltage reading is false. If you have a multimeter, do a search for how to check if a TPS is working correctly (I'm sure there are multiple videos showing the process) and see what happens as you rotate it from 0-100%. -John

Based on what you've written earlier, what makes you think it's an ECU setting as opposed to a failing TPS? Have you already confirmed the TPS is working correctly across its range with a multimeter? -John

I replaced both master cylinders today. The clutch MC had developed a slow leak which revealed itself a few weeks ago when visiting Bruce Beachman's shop (I suspect the Westfield was punishing me). Whereas the AP Racing brake MC was a planned upgrade. This is the same MC used by Caterham in the R-spec cars, but with slight differences to the lugs to allow more clearance in the Westfield installation. Compared to the stock Girling MC, the AP has a much beefier case, slightly bigger bores 60/40 split vs. 50/50 and each MC is individually shimmed to remove all slack. What a difference! Firmer pedal and much easier to modulate. Highly recommended! -John

And for those of you who wish to learn more about this great cause, see Ross's blog post here. If you wish to donate, you can do so through this link. -John

Congrats on completing this epic journey. When I first read about your plans I thought you were nuts and would never make it. Glad I was only half right -John

Welcome and glad you found the site! One option to consider is the dry sump. This increases ground clearance by over an inch (some say 35mm). The downside is that the bellhousing becomes the low point as it is normally flush with the bottom of the wet sump. If that's a concern, Raceline make a compact sump that requires a different flywheel and starter which corrects this and is flush with the bottom of the dry sump. -John

Unfortunately, I don't know anything about the Ford ECU, so I'm not sure if you can even access a live events view, let alone log. Someone here might know. I used to live in West Seattle and would run down the back roads to Alki. Lots of fun, but crowded. I'm now closer to the foothills East of Seattle. Less traffic, more corners -John

BTW if you have the ability to do data logging with your ECU, it's worth doing. It might help you narrow down the issue (e.g. if the TPS load site keeps changing rapidly under steady throttle, then you know that sensor circuit is an issue.) -John

My wife has a Palisade (SUV on the right in that photo). Scaling seems accurate to me. Not to hijack the thread and have someone report me to the overly zealous admin, but... -John

I don't think marijuana would cause that. Psychedelic mushrooms or LSD is more likely. -John

Vapor lock is a possibility. Has anything under bonnet changed that would impact airflow, heat generation, or fuel line routing? If not, and given this sounds like a new issue, I'd be more inclined to look for an electrical issue, and likely start with the coil pack. As they age, heat soak can cause internals to expand and either break electrical connections or reduce contact area thus increasing resistance and performance. Next time it happens, check for spark. Over the years, I’ve had one coil pack, one TPS, and one engine loom all fail with similar results to yours. The only difference is that when the engine loom failed the issue slowly morphed and was no longer limited to poor running after the car had sat for 5-10 minutes on a warm day. -John

If you were previously using the throttle cable to set idle rather than have it a little loose as you do now, that would make sense. See my earlier comment about the shroud and cable expanding at different rates when hot. If it does happen again when things are truly hot, check if the slack you put in the cable is still there. -John

Congrats on the purchase! How does it compare to your old LS3-powered car? I imagine traction is now a little easier to find over 100mph? -John

Congrats Steve! Sad to see you se7enless, but hope you continue to hang around here. -John

Car looks great and it's always good to see another person who recognizes the virtue in owning both a Se7en and a Miata Hope the registration goes as smoothly as your late night run. BTW I fixed the sideways photos, but see the FAQ for the steps to avoid the issue in the future. -John

@Vovchandr not to be the master of the obvious, but you could solve both your TWM and center cap issues by simply being the high bidder on Brightonuk's car Less than 2 days left! -John

Looking forward to watching this and having another se7en in the area! -John

The Pectel should control the IAC. Does it have an electrical connector? I wonder if the butterflies are not designed to close completely under normal return spring pressure? With a normal setup sans IAC, that's not an issue. The butterflies need to allow some air through them to achieve idle. However, with your set up that may not be the case. The size of your IAC and the associated settings in the ECU may require complete closure. Didn't you also mention that Borla made some comment about the state of your air bleeds prior to the rebuild? I wonder if renewing them is allowing more air to enter when the IAC valve is open, thus making things more pronounced than before? -John

Thought I'd follow up with the outcome. I left the car at VRM Monday so they could weld in an O2 bung in the exhaust for temporary use on the dyno and try again. With the O2 in that location, reading changed dramatically and matched what we expected. After optimizing the ignition curve and playing with needle height, the torque curve increased about 5-8 ft-lbs across the entire curve. Peak HP went from 88.2 at 5720 rpm to 95.34 at 6120 rpm, and peak torque from 86.09 at 4990 rpm to 93.22 at 4520 rpm. The numbers not only went up, but the distance between the peaks increased. Well worth the effort. Thanks again to all who chimed in earlier when I was trying to figure this out. -John

Thanks Vlad. I've never seen a set up like this. That certainly doesn't mean it won't work or is wrong, but it raises questions given the odd behavior you've been seeing. As I recall you were having heat related rpm changes before. That can happen when the throttle cable and the throttle shroud expand from heat at different rates. If the shroud expands more, then it has the net effect of tightening the throttle cable and increasing revs. I would follow @ashyers advice and rule out the throttle cable first. -John

How do you adjust idle speed with that linkage? I don't see a screw adjustment anywhere. Is that not shown? The issue (or part of the issue) may be down to funkiness in that throttle linkage. I'd follow the steps @ashyers suggested. Easiest first: when the issue presents itself, reach underneath and see if you can manually close the throttles. Next try removing the throttle cable and see what happens. Murphy's Law states that you might have multiple issues going on. Occam's Razor does not apply to Se7ens. -John